Keith E Volmar1, Michael O Idowu, Rhona J Souers, Donald S Karcher, Raouf E Nakhleh. 1. From the Department of Pathology, Rex Pathology Associates, Raleigh, North Carolina (Dr Volmar); the Department of Pathology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond (Dr Idowu); the Department of Biostatistics, College of American Pathologists, Northfield, Illinois (Ms Souers); the Department of Pathology, George Washington University, Washington, DC (Dr Karcher); and the Department of Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida (Dr Nakhleh).
Abstract
CONTEXT: Turnaround time (TAT) for large or complex surgical pathology specimens is an indicator of efficiency in anatomic pathology and may affect coordination of patient care. OBJECTIVE: To establish benchmarks for TAT and to identify practice characteristics that may influence TAT. DESIGN: Participants in a 2012 Q-Probes quality improvement program of the College of American Pathologists retrospectively reviewed all surgical pathology cases from the prior 6 months to identify up to 50 cases coded as Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 88307 (excluding biopsies) or 88309. Participants reported the times and dates of accessioning and final sign-out. RESULTS: A total of 56 institutions reported on 2763 large or complex cases, which included 70% with CPT code 88307 and 30% with CPT code 88309. Cases requiring special handling comprised 51.5%, and 48.5% were routine. Among all institutions the median TAT was 2.72 calendar days (10th-90th percentile range, 6.23-1.22 days). Longer TAT occurred in governmental institutions (median, 6.06 versus 2.13 days; P < .001) and in institutions that mandate overnight fixation for some specimen types (median, 3.83 versus 2.07 days; P = .03). Longer TAT was associated with CPT code 88309 (median, 3.99 versus 2.82 days; P < .001), special handling (median, 4.13 versus 1.94 days; P < .001), frozen section (median, 3.38 versus 2.92 days; P < .001), radical cancer resection (P < .001), and malignant cases (P < .001). Turnaround time was not significantly affected by either pathology training programs or routine weekend sign-out. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides benchmark data for TAT in large or complex surgical pathology specimens. Turnaround time was good overall, but the range among participating institutions was wide.
CONTEXT: Turnaround time (TAT) for large or complex surgical pathology specimens is an indicator of efficiency in anatomic pathology and may affect coordination of patient care. OBJECTIVE: To establish benchmarks for TAT and to identify practice characteristics that may influence TAT. DESIGN:Participants in a 2012 Q-Probes quality improvement program of the College of American Pathologists retrospectively reviewed all surgical pathology cases from the prior 6 months to identify up to 50 cases coded as Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 88307 (excluding biopsies) or 88309. Participants reported the times and dates of accessioning and final sign-out. RESULTS: A total of 56 institutions reported on 2763 large or complex cases, which included 70% with CPT code 88307 and 30% with CPT code 88309. Cases requiring special handling comprised 51.5%, and 48.5% were routine. Among all institutions the median TAT was 2.72 calendar days (10th-90th percentile range, 6.23-1.22 days). Longer TAT occurred in governmental institutions (median, 6.06 versus 2.13 days; P < .001) and in institutions that mandate overnight fixation for some specimen types (median, 3.83 versus 2.07 days; P = .03). Longer TAT was associated with CPT code 88309 (median, 3.99 versus 2.82 days; P < .001), special handling (median, 4.13 versus 1.94 days; P < .001), frozen section (median, 3.38 versus 2.92 days; P < .001), radical cancer resection (P < .001), and malignant cases (P < .001). Turnaround time was not significantly affected by either pathology training programs or routine weekend sign-out. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides benchmark data for TAT in large or complex surgical pathology specimens. Turnaround time was good overall, but the range among participating institutions was wide.
Authors: Sarah Compeau; Michael Howlett; Stephanie Matchett; Jennifer Shea; Jacqueline Fraser; Rose McCloskey; Paul Atkinson Journal: Cureus Date: 2016-10-06
Authors: Innocent Emmanuel; Samuel Abaniwo; Patrick Nzekwe; Samuel Kelechi Richard; Olufunmilayo Abobarin; Abdulazis Longwap; Alhamdu Joseph Journal: Niger Med J Date: 2020-08-04